This judgment text has undergone conversion so that it is mobile and web-friendly. This may have created formatting or alignment issues. Please refer to the PDF copy for a print-friendly version.

In the High Court of the Republic of Singapore
[1998] SGHC 160
Adm in Rem 582/1995
Between
Cotan Petroleum Pte Ltd
… Plaintiff
And
The Owners of The Ship or Vessel "Endurance 1" ex Tokai Maru
… Defendant
grounds of decision

This judgment is subject to final editorial corrections approved by the court and/or redaction pursuant to the publisher’s duty in compliance with the law, for publication in LawNet and/or the Singapore Law Reports.
Cotan Petroleum Pte Ltd v The Owners of The Ship or Vessel "Endurance 1" ex Tokai Maru
[1998] SGHC 160
Adm in Rem 582/1995
Lai Siu Chiu J
12 May 1998
1 
Judgment:

2 GROUNDS OF JUDGMENT
3 
4 The facts
5 
6 Clause 1 (description and condition of vessel)
(1) At the date of delivery of the vessel under this charter
7 
8 Clause 3 (duty to maintain)
9 Clause 18 (Sub-letting)
10 Clause 46
11 Clause 49
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 Ionian Light’Tokai Maru
20 The plaintiffs’ case
21 
22 
23 
(3) on 2 April at about 1010 hrs, the No 1 cargo pump broke down;
24 
25 The Defendants’ case
26 Breach of clause 1 of the charterparty - the seaworthiness obligation
27 
28 
: ‘Vessel standing by awaiting next fishing vessel.’‘engine slow ahead’‘M/E

(main engine) and A/E (auxiliary engine) running well’
29 
30 
31 
32 
33 
34 
35 
36 
37 
38 Cargo pumps
39 
40 
41 Breach of clause 3
42 
43 after The Fina Samco
44 
45 38.    Clause 9 provides that:
46 Clause 9 also contains an anti-technicality clause:
47 In default of such proper and timely payment,
48 
49 not in default of payment of hireafterThe Afovos [1983] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 335). The letter of 15 April 1994 reads:
50 SUBJECT: CHARTERHIRE OF M.T." TOKAI MARU"
51 thth
52 thth May 1994 by latest 16th April 1994.
53 Thanking you.
54 
55 
56 
57 
We refer to your fax dated 18thth April 94.]
58 The Rio Sun [1981] 2 LLR 489 and in The Afovos
59 free from all charters, encumbrances, mortgages and

maritime liens’
afterbefore
60 
61 
62 Damages
63 Hadley v Baxendale (1854) 9 Exch 341 and restated in Victoria

Laundry v Newman Industries
64 
65 
66 
67 
68 
69 
70 
71 Conversion of the water makers
72 
73 Hall v Barclay [1937] 3 All ER 620). In Hall v Barclay
74 Counterclaim
apart from the proper enforcement of his claim.’
75 
76 
77 Lai Siu Chiu
78 Judge
79 12 May 1998
Lai Siu Chiu J
Loo Dip Seng, Goh Kok Leong & Hung Ning Shing (Ang & Partners) for the plaintiffs
Gourdeep Singh (Gourdeep Singh & Partners) for the defendants
Back to Top

This judgment text has undergone conversion so that it is mobile and web-friendly. This may have created formatting or alignment issues. Please refer to the PDF copy for a print-friendly version.

Version No 1: 11 Sep 2026 (01:05 hrs)